You are on page 1of 3

Answer key mock bar 1

1. SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes, the Embassy can invoke immunity from suit. Section 10 of the Maintenance Agreement is not
necessarily a waiver of sovereign immunity from suit. It was meant to apply in case the Republic of
Kafiristan elects to sue in the local courts or waives its immunity by a subsequent act. The establishment
of a diplomatic mission is a sovereign function. This encompasses its maintenance and upkeep. The

Maintenance Agreement was in pursuit of a sovereign activity (Republic of the Indonesia vs. Vinzon, 405
SCRA 126).

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

No, the embassy cannot invoke immunity from suit, because it has been provided under Section 10 of
their charter of agreement that Kafiristan expressly waived its immunity from suit. This is supported by
the provision on Section 3, Article XVI of the 1987 Constitution, which says that the State may not be
sued without its consent. Since consent was expressly given from their charter of agreement, the
embassy cannot invoke immunity from suit

2. SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The judgment of conviction should be reversed on appeal. It relied mainly on the extrajudicial
confession of the accused. The lawyer assisting them must be independent. City Attorney Justin Salazar
is not independent. As City Attorney, he provided legal support to the City Mayor in performing his
duties,

which include the maintenance of peace and order (People vs. Sunga, 399 SCRA 624).

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

The judgment of conviction should be reversed. The police officers committed an offense by confronting
the three accused. This is a violation to Section 12, Article III of the 1987 Constitution, which states that
any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of
his right to remain silent and to have a competent and independent counsel preferably of his own
choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights
cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

The Judgment of conviction should be affirmed if the accused failed to object when their extrajudicial
confession was offered in evidence, which was rendered it admissible (People vs. Samus, 389 SCRA 93).

3. SUGGESTED ANSWER:

A can file an action for specific performance and damages against ABC

Cars since the damage to the Volvo Sedan's upholstery was caused before

delivery of the same to A, and therefore prior to the transfer of ownership to the
latter. (Article 1477, New Civil Code). Under Article 1170 of the New Civil Code,

those who contravene the tenor of the obligation are liable for damages. Hence,

an action for specific performance against ABC Corporation to deliver the agreed

Volvo Sedan in the contract, free from any damage or defects, with

corresponding damages will lie against ABC Cars.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

A can sue ABC Cars for specific performance or rescission because the

former has contractual relations with latter.

4. SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue should be granted.

Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, the venue of real actions shall be with the proper court
having jurisdiction over the area where the real property involved is situated. An action for
annulment of mortgage is a real action if there has already been a foreclosure sale. (See Chua v.
Total Office Products and Services, 30 September 2005).

Here there was already a foreclosure sale. Hence the action for annulment of mortgage is a real
action which should have been filed in Makati where the real property is situated.

5. Answer: Only Aguila can be prosecuted before the Philippine Court. Being the Philippine
Consul General in Singapore, as a public officer, the provisions of the Revised Penal Code can
be given extra-judicial application, as the crime committed by him is related to the duties of his
office. Aaron and Leona, being private persons, cannot be prosecuted before the Philippine Court
because regarding the offenses committed by them, the provisions of the Revised Penal Code
cannot be given extra-territorial application.

Aguila committed bribery and Aaron corruption of a public officer. Leona committed
falsification of a public document as a principal by direct participation and Aaron as a principal
by inducement. (Art. 2, Revised Penal Code

6. Answer: 1) Pia did not commit a crime, The felony closest to making Pia criminally liable is
Grave Scandal, but then such act is not to be considered as highly scandalous and offensive
against decency and good customs. In the first place, it was not done in a public place and within
public knowledge or view. As a matter of fact it was discovered by the executives accidentally
and they have to use binoculars to have public and full view of Pia sunbathing in the nude. 2)
The business executives did not commit any crime. Their acts could not be acts of lasciviousness
[as there was no overt lustful act), or slander, as the eventual talk of the town, resulting from her
sunbathing, is not directly imputed to the business executives, and besides such topic is not
intended to defame or put Pia to ridicule.
7. SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Since the money market placement of Marlon is in the nature of a loan to Lyric Bank, and
since he did not authorize the release of the money market placement to Ingrid, the obligation
of Lyric Bank to him has not been paid. Lyric Bank still has the obligation to pay him.Since
Yamaha Bank indorsed the check bearing the forged indorsement of Marlon and
guaranteed all indorsements, including the forged indorsement, when it presented the check
to Lyric Bank, it should be held liable to it.However, since the issuance of the check was
attended with the negligence of Lyric Bank, it should share the loss with Yamaha Bank on
a fifty percent basis

(Allied Banking Corporation v. Lim Sio Wan, 549 SCRA 504 (2008)).

8.SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The instrument contains a promise to pay and was signed by the maker, Antonio Reyes
(Section 1(a) of Negotiable Instruments Law).The promise to pay is unconditional insofar as the
reference to the setting of the sun in the west in the evening and its rising in the east in the
morning are concerned. These are certain to happen (Section 4(c) of Negotiable Instruments
Law).The promise to pay is conditional, because the money will be taken from a particular fund,
BPI Account No. 1234 (Section 3 of Negotiable Instruments Law).The Instrument contains a
promise to pay a sum certain in money, P100,000.00 (Section (b) of Negotiable Instruments
Law).The money is payable at a determinable future time, sixty days after August 10, 2013
(Section 4(a) of Negotiable Instruments Law).

The instrument is not payable to order or to bearer (Section 1(d) of Negotiable Instruments Law).

9. SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) Yes, the sale to the other person is valid as a sale with a resolutory
condition because what operates as a suspensive condition for Eva operates a resolutory condition for
the buyer. FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANS WER: Yes, the sale to the other person is valid. However, the buyer
acquired the property subject to a resolutory

Hence, upon Eva's passing the Bar, the rights of the other buyer terminated and Eva acquired ownership
of the property.

SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The sale to another person before Eva could buy it from Manuel is
valid, as the contract between Manuel and Eva is a mere promise to sell and Eva has not acquired a real
right over the land assuming that there is a price stipulated in the contract for the contract to be
considered a sale and there was delivery or tradition of the thing sold.

10. SUGGESTED ANSWER: JURIDICAL CAPACITY is the fitness to be the subject of legal relations while
CAPACITY TO ACT is the power or to do acts with legal effect. The former is inherent in every natural
person and is lost only through death while the latter is merely acquired and may be lost even before
death (Art. 37, NCC).

You might also like